Headlines

I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Kunta needs to spend less timing smoking poles and more time reading them.

Wtf is she even getting these numbers?

Dirt McGirt on October 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

He makes them up. Rasmussen isn’t R+5, it’s R+2.6 at most, and that would be an extremely recent development; look at their tracking of partisan trends and you’ll get an idea. Rasmussen isn’t going to put out a poll that contradicts these numbers.

Keep in mind also that Rasmussen’s party identification tracking was D+1.5 in September 2010 and D+2.9 in October of that year, and you’ll get a good idea of why Kunta Kinte is so desperate to write off Rasmussen.

During the debate, I loved how Obama claimed that there were “studies” that said that Romney’s plan has to raise taxes on the middle class by $5 trillion. In truth, it’s ONE study by a center-left think tank–and one of the two authors has been saying for weeks that the study, after reconsideration, doesn’t support Obama’s claim one bit.

Obama is a lying SOS.

If he wants to whine about the offsets, have at it. Romney should say that everything is one the table. But yesterday, on a morning show, that fat-a** lesbian, Hillary Rosen, was claiming Romney was going to end the mortgage-interest deduction for everyone. WTF? Take out a Form 1040, Schedule A and start looking it over for things to tag the wealthy with. For starters, how about no deduction for interest and real-estate taxes on second homes? How about eliminating the SIT deduction for all taxpayers? That tends to favor blue state residents over red states. If the blue staters don’t like, they can start holding their state governments responsible.

Say, how is Obama getting away from raising the medical-expense deduction threshold from 7.5% of AGI to 10% of AGI without any complaining?